JUDGMENT :

This appeal is preferred by the Appellant/Insurance Company, challenging the award dated 15.07.2015 passed in M.V.O.P.No.186/2012 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Addl.District Judge, Madanapalle, wherein the Tribunal while partly allowing the petition, awarded a compensation of Rs.4,20,000/-with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of deposit to the petitioners/claimants, for the death of T.Kadirappa in a motor vehicle accident.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as parties before the tribunal.

3. As seen from the record, originally the petitioners filed an application U/s.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity “the Act”) claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-on account of the death of T.Kadirappa, who is the husband of the 1st petitioner, father of petitioners No.2 and 3, in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 29.08.2011.

4. The facts would show that on 28.08.2011 at about 10.15 a.m., the deceased T.Kadirappa got into a tempo (Mahindra company) bearing No.AP 03 U 8810 with a load of vegetables. When the tempo reached E.B.Cross Road at about 01.15 a.m. on 29.08.2011 a car being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed the tempo. Due to that impact, the tempo turned turtle, due to which the deceased fell out of the vehicle and received a head injury, apart from other injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Adakkambanaru Government Hospital and he succumbed to injuries, while undergoing treatment in the said hospital.

The deceased T.Kadirappa was aged 45 years at the time of the accident, and he was an agriculturist and also doing vegetables business. He used to supply vegetables to Koyambedu Market, Chennai earning Rs.10,000/-per month. In this connection, a case was registered by SHO, Tirivallam Police Station, Vellore District, Tamilnadu, in Cr.No.230/2011 U/s.337, 338, 279 and 304-A of Indian Penal Code against the driver of the car bearing No.AP 15 AL 2222. The 2nd respondent is the insurer of the tempo bearing No.AP 03 U 8810. The 1st respondent is the driver-cum-owner of the tempo bearing No.AP 03 U 8810. The 3rd respondent is the owner of the car. The 4th respondent is insurer of car and all the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners.

5. Before, the Tribunal, the 1st respondent filed a written statement denying the material averments in the petition, and contended that on 29.08.2011 at about 01.15 a.m. when they reached E.B.Cross Road, a car bearing No.AP 15 AL 2222 came on high speed without proper caution, and to avoid hitting the car, the 1st respondent who was driving the tempo applied sudden brake and due to it, the vehicle turned turtle, and as a result, the deceased T.Kadirappa fell out of the vehicle and sustained a head injury and other injuries on his body. Immediately he was shifted to Govt. Hospital, Adakkambanaru, where he succumbed to the injuries. The accident occurred only due to the negligence of the driver of car bearing No.AP 15 AL 2222.

6. The 2nd respondent filed a written statement, denying the material averments of the petition, contended that the petitioners did not file any record in support of the contention of age, occupation and monthly income of deceased T.Kadirappa. It is further contended that the deceased T.Kadirappa is aged more than 55 years and was not earning Rs.10,000/-per month. There was no rash and negligent driving on part of the driver of the tempo bearing No.AP 03 U 8810, and the said accident happened only due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of the car bearing No.AP 15 AL 2222.

7. The 4th respondent/Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Karimnagar, filed a written statement resisting, while traversing the material averments with regard to the proof of age, avocation, monthly earnings of the deceased, manner of accident, rash and negligence on part of the driver of the offending vehicle, liability to pay co